On the agenda

1. 1Call to Order - Roll Call▶ 0:00
2. 2

   Approval of the April 19, 2016 Community Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors Meeting Minutes

   approved

   The CRA Board approved the minutes of the April 19, 2016 meeting by voice vote.

   • motion:Motion to approve the April 19, 2016 CRA Board of Directors meeting minutes. (passed)

   #April 19, 2016 CRA Board Meeting Minutes

   ▶ Jump to 0:57 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:58] Next item on agenda is approval of the April 19th CRE meetings minutes. Move for [00:01:04] motion and second. Any discussion? All those in favor, please signify by saying [00:01:10] aye. Aye. Opposed, like sign. Next is consideration of the sale of property in [00:01:16] respect to the residents of Orange Lake Development Project. Ms. Manns? Yes, Mr. [00:01:21] Mayor. We have Frank Starkey in attendance this evening, Jim Goodchild, [00:01:27] Jose Cardenas, and Andy Mihalic all here representing the development team [00:01:32] that has submitted the proposal for the redevelopment of the [00:01:37] First Baptist Church property, and Mr. Iazzoni is prepared to present this item [00:01:42] to you in detail this evening. Thank you very much, Chairman Manns, Mayor, and other [00:01:48] chairmen. In December 2005, the CR acquired what was formerly known as the Baptist

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

3. 3

   ↳You arrived here from a search for “People's Places, LLC” — transcript expanded below

   Consider the Sale of Property in Respect to the Residence of Orange Lake Development Project

   approved

   The CRA Board considered the sale of the former Baptist Church property (Residence of Orange Lake Development Project) to People's Places, LLC for $300,000, with 88 residential units to be built and a CRA property tax rebate as developer incentive. After staff presentation and discussion including remarks from Director Peltz (by phone) expressing concerns about the financial structuring, the motion to approve was passed.

   • motion:Motion to approve sale of the former Baptist Church property to People's Places, LLC for $300,000 with 88 residential units and CRA property tax rebate. (passed)

   📍Central Ave.📍former Baptist Church property🏢Main Street Landings🏢People's Places, LLC🏢Zimmerman-Bolt👤Bill👤Director Davis👤Director Peltz👤Director Phillips👤Mr. Izzoni👤Mr. Melton👤Mr. Starkey👤Wilton Simpson#2012 CRA plan update#CRA property tax rebate#RFQ 16.007#Residence of Orange Lake Development Project#Zimmerman-Bolt urban core residential market analysis

   ▶ Jump to 1:50 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:01:55] Church property. The intent was to take the strategic city asset that has [00:02:00] not been on the tax rolls for at least 40 years and turn it into a mixed-use [00:02:05] development property. In the 10 years the CR has held the property, there has [00:02:10] been several attempts to develop the site. However, none have bared any fruit. [00:02:14] In 2012, the CRA plan was updated, which recommended to sell the site and return [00:02:21] it to the tax rolls in the form of high-rent apartments and to limit [00:02:26] commercial development so not to compete with Main Street. On November 13th, [00:02:31] Julia's special day, 2015, RFQ 16.007 was issued, and on January 19, 2016, [00:02:41] People, Places, LLC was selected as the qualified developer. Staff immediately [00:02:47] entered into negotiations. The agreement is presented as follows, $300,000 [00:02:54] purchase price, eight residential units are to be built, I'm sorry, 88 residential [00:02:59] units are to be built, a CRA property tax rebate as an incentive to [00:03:05] construct high-quality units to attract household incomes of $50,000 or more. [00:03:10] City impact and permit fees are to be a way to further mitigate risk to the [00:03:16] developer. The design of this project is one of new urbanism, and it's based on the [00:03:22] Zimmerman-Bolt urban core residential market analysis that supports the [00:03:26] construction of 100 new units each year over the next five years. The benefit to [00:03:33] the city is as follows. Approximately 170 new residents will generate $4.4 [00:03:39] million in additional household incomes directly within urban core annually, [00:03:45] $8 million in new investment capital that will generate three times the outload [00:03:49] revenue per acre than current downtown properties. A new residential construction [00:03:55] where the average date built for 44 adjoining properties is 1947. In terms of [00:04:03] what in-plan impact analysis provided, 67 new jobs totaling $2.4 million in labor [00:04:08] income, 11 being in value-added and construction output as the project [00:04:13] continues. And to add to that, obviously there'll be new downtown jobs as a result of [00:04:21] increased business activity within the urban core. The economic goal of this [00:04:26] project is to support and attract downtown businesses so that the city [00:04:30] can provide a complete array of easy accessible services that the citizens of [00:04:35] New Port Richey can enjoy for many years to come. The recommendation is to sell [00:04:41] former Baptist Church property to Peoples and Places. Thank you very much. [00:04:46] Thank you. We'll open this up for public comment. Mr. Starkey, did you or any of your [00:04:52] team want to say anything? Anyone else in the audience wish to address CRA on [00:05:02] this matter? Seeing no one come forward, I'll bring it back to the agency. Move for [00:05:10] approved comment. Thank you. We have a second. Director Davis. I just want to [00:05:25] recognize Bill and the questions that he asked. I think they were very important [00:05:29] for me to help me get through this and make my decision, but it turned out all [00:05:34] in favor. Thank you, Bill. Mr. Starkey. I was going to see if Mr. Feltz wanted to make a comment since he's not here. [00:05:46] Director Feltz. Mr. Director, or whatever your title is, I'm sorry. I just got off I-65 up here, up in [00:06:00] Louisville. Can you hear me okay, or do I need to take you off this speaker? What do I [00:06:04] need to do? Because I can't tell if you can hear me or not. We can hear you fine. [00:06:09] Very good. Yeah, I really am disappointed that I'm not able to be there, [00:06:16] obviously, to have conversations with the proposed developer before the meeting, and [00:06:21] they have to listen to my booming voice from above the head or to the sides or [00:06:27] whatever, and obviously because this is a negotiation and, you know, it gets [00:06:34] into being quasi-judicial and everything else, but I do have some general [00:06:41] comments and obviously some concerns, and it usually is my point to try to [00:06:50] bring those out, and that's the reason that you saw that the addendum that Mr. [00:06:57] Izzoni put out after he gave us the initial package. All well and good, but [00:07:04] if we are looking at real estate development and overall development in [00:07:09] the city and taking care of the public dollar, I thought it was important to get [00:07:15] a real true understanding, and I'm a little disappointed that it wasn't put [00:07:19] in the original package because I felt as though with where we had had the [00:07:27] project, where we were going, that it was only appropriate that we have it across [00:07:32] the board. What the total impact is to not only downtown, the city, the CRA, and [00:07:42] those things. I appreciate Mr. Izzoni's thoroughness in putting together the [00:07:49] answers to the questions I posed, because obviously, not wanting to be [00:07:54] sarcastic, but we've taken a $3,100,000 project, and at the end of the [00:08:01] day, it has a market value of somewhere around $1.2 million today, and it's [00:08:08] interesting to see that the vacant property is worth less than the [00:08:12] incubator building that we've assessed at about $900,000 with its current lease [00:08:18] on it. But in wanting to move development forward, and obviously we'll [00:08:26] see this on council as it moves forward, it just it begs the question, you [00:08:35] know, how much we are putting into this deal to make it work. My biggest thing in [00:08:43] looking over the memorandum is, obviously, all of the the amplitory costs [00:08:48] that all add up to the bottom line, and the rebate, but over and above, some of [00:08:56] Mr. Izzoni's thoughts with why we want to give them the price that we're giving [00:09:03] them, and then at the very close of his memorandum, he flips around and says, you [00:09:08] know, all these wonderful things that are happening, so I understand that, [00:09:13] because obviously being in the real estate development business for a long time, [00:09:17] those kind of things, but over and above that, the true economic package, and I [00:09:23] just want my colleagues on the CRA to know that we've structured a deal for [00:09:30] Main Street Landings, which is supposed to go forward, and we've got a couple [00:09:35] other properties in the city, and I just see that if we set the deals where we're [00:09:41] setting them, we can expect the developers to come in, and whether it's [00:09:46] good, bad, or indifferent, we are going to be a joint venture partner until they get [00:09:51] done, and we love the group, we like the people that are involved in the group, we [00:09:57] all know that, but at the end of the day, our fiduciary rights and what we carry [00:10:04] is how we approach taking property that other councils bought at the height of [00:10:10] the market, and try to put them back into some operational mode, so that we can [00:10:16] continue the positive momentum that we've placed. So I know we'll see this [00:10:21] again, I just hope that in the future when we're putting this together, that we [00:10:26] get all the crucial information to look at at one time, and not try to dovetail [00:10:32] things towards the end, due to the fact of it gives us, as CRA members and then [00:10:41] as council members, the ability to explain those things to the public, which [00:10:46] I've had five phone calls about this since being on the road since last [00:10:50] Thursday. Also with the conceptual drawing, and the gentleman that talked [00:10:55] earlier this evening, with regards to Central Ave., I think we need to [00:11:02] be clear that the median area we were looking at was really more towards this [00:11:08] end of the street in the development, and it would be my overview later to [00:11:15] enhance their sidewalks and some LED lighting, like our [00:11:20] streetscape on the upper end of Central, and not get into a median through the [00:11:25] whole thing, just to address that gentleman's question, and it was hard for [00:11:29] me to hear his name and everything, so I apologize. But I know this takes us [00:11:34] forward, I know we use the millennial consultant's report to do that, I know [00:11:40] it's going to take us some places, but again, I reiterate, we've taken a three [00:11:46] million, one hundred thousand dollar investment by other councils, and in this [00:11:51] case, at the end of the day, we're looking at somewhere around a million to get [00:11:56] three hundred up front, which is good. I am concerned about the five-year blend [00:12:01] out on the on the ad valorem, but of course, if somebody wanted to bring and [00:12:09] point it back to me, Bill, it hasn't been ad valorem since 1976, or whatever the [00:12:14] 40 years is, I recognize that, but at the end of the day, I believe it sets us [00:12:20] apart, and bringing the right kind of mix of new properties into the downtown, but [00:12:26] I thought it was important to make sure we have all the facts up front, so that [00:12:31] we make a good decision as a CRA, and then recommend it on to ourselves, as on [00:12:37] the City Council. So, thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Phelps. If it will make you [00:12:41] feel any better, I introduced Mr. Melton and his neighbor on Central to Mr. Starkey [00:12:47] between the meetings. They could be involved and talk about some of the [00:12:54] ideas that are being kicked around through Central. I've looked at this [00:12:59] property on a long-term basis. I saw what my wife's hometown did with their [00:13:11] riverfront back in the 70s, where they built a building that ultimately has [00:13:19] already been torn down because it became just a disaster. I really believe [00:13:27] that we've been tasked with the responsibility for making a decision for [00:13:34] New Port Richey that may be a once-in-a-generation, or perhaps even [00:13:40] once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to set the stage for the redevelopment of that [00:13:46] parcel and to make New Port Richey even better than it is now. The idea of [00:13:54] bringing in a better, higher-income apartment complex, getting it built, [00:14:02] creates additional foot traffic downtown. I can tell you that, not just the [00:14:10] Millennials, but I think a lot of us would be open to the idea of living [00:14:17] within a block or two of the downtown. It's a great opportunity for people [00:14:25] to look at if they don't want to have, you know, their own single-family home as [00:14:31] an alternative. And this project has the potential to make the historic downtown [00:14:39] business district something special for decades to go forward. And for that [00:14:45] reason, I'm very supportive of it and I think we need to proceed. Any other [00:14:52] discussion? Well said. Director Phillips is at this point. Very good points and I [00:15:00] reading the memorandum most of what's in here I already discussed I think with [00:15:03] Mary and myself but um that we were caught both on the same page I agree [00:15:08] with everything the mayor's just said I mean this make no doubt about it this is [00:15:12] a huge change I mean for downtown before which I can't remember not since I've [00:15:16] been born in 1974 even any kind of project even close to this and been [00:15:21] introduced and you know such as my father just don't really get it it's a [00:15:27] dumb idea and you know they can't get past more rentals we don't need more [00:15:34] rundown complexes and multi what we don't need and what's encouraging to me [00:15:39] about people places just like with Wilton Simpson is they're bringing start [00:15:44] the project their money to the table they're not waiting to see what [00:15:47] everyone else is going to do they're building the market and to me that's [00:15:50] extremely encouraging I hear about demographics demographics demographic [00:15:57] I keep bringing up a little bit of rat that the beef of Brady's going but I [00:16:02] think seven years from now they're gonna wish they had a breath after hopefully [00:16:07] have room because I think that's the kind of market we're building and I'm [00:16:11] extremely excited about their project it is a huge change to downtown something [00:16:16] I've never seen in this lifetime there was a lot of excitement about the major [00:16:20] lane project I think most of the units were slotted as condos sold out [00:16:25] they were close to me and sold out by the time they broke ground but I think [00:16:30] we have the right partners on this project I don't think it's going to be [00:16:32] too big I just think it's going to do wonderful wonderful things where we're [00:16:36] trying to move our city and I can't reiterate that you've got the right [00:16:40] partners on this project and I support it on your position we have a motion [00:16:51] mr. Phyllis all right okay I say hearing hearing no further discussion [00:17:01] all those in favor please signify by saying aye aye aye thank you opposed [00:17:06] like sign in mr. belts defense I've been on that into these sessions before and [00:17:14] there's probably a six or seven second lag between when he hears us and when we [00:17:20] hear him respond back because of the it's not optimal that is the only item [00:17:29] that we have on tonight's agenda any other communications before I entertain [00:17:35] a motion to adjourn [00:17:38] thank you

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

4. 4Communications
5. 5Adjournment